RE: Ridge: Bush officials sought to raise terror alert before '04 vote
August 24, 2009 at 10:46 am
I'm talking about evidence and facts.
I listed a lot of facts, did you get that memo?
The reference to (quote, unquote) "shadow government" was trying to put a name to the obvious conclusion that the people who are really in charge are hand picking presidents. If there is, in theory, someone more in charge than the executive branch of the government, that would make it a "shadow government". I use the term with quotations to show that I know it's use has been invalidated by lunatics.
If I can't use any term that has ever been used by a crazy person, I will have a much limited vocabulary.
Those are what I take to be facts. Argue with them. Don't ignore them. Did Obama name almost the entirety of his office from only two think tanks? I think it's a fact, argue with it. Can we go and read the literature put out by these very think tanks, to get a feel for where this administration is going? Because they have interesting works, have you read them? They are factual, in the sense that they exist, and I referenced them. Argue with that. Did Obama seal his school records? Was that in fact literally the first thing he did in office? I think so, I purport those as fact, argue with them.
Argue with the facts I am trying to present, or don't. But don't pretend I am friggin Glenn Beck. You get sidetracked when I try to use the term "shadow government" to describe what I think is... ...well, by definition, a shadow government. But I put it in quotations, to try to show that I admitted that the value of that word has been compromised...
I would love to discuss this issue, but you are starting to sound like Kyu.
Thanks,
-Pip
I listed a lot of facts, did you get that memo?
The reference to (quote, unquote) "shadow government" was trying to put a name to the obvious conclusion that the people who are really in charge are hand picking presidents. If there is, in theory, someone more in charge than the executive branch of the government, that would make it a "shadow government". I use the term with quotations to show that I know it's use has been invalidated by lunatics.
If I can't use any term that has ever been used by a crazy person, I will have a much limited vocabulary.
Quote:ridiculous comparisons without substantial evidenceIf you would so kindly reference post #9, so I don't have to quote myself...
Those are what I take to be facts. Argue with them. Don't ignore them. Did Obama name almost the entirety of his office from only two think tanks? I think it's a fact, argue with it. Can we go and read the literature put out by these very think tanks, to get a feel for where this administration is going? Because they have interesting works, have you read them? They are factual, in the sense that they exist, and I referenced them. Argue with that. Did Obama seal his school records? Was that in fact literally the first thing he did in office? I think so, I purport those as fact, argue with them.
Argue with the facts I am trying to present, or don't. But don't pretend I am friggin Glenn Beck. You get sidetracked when I try to use the term "shadow government" to describe what I think is... ...well, by definition, a shadow government. But I put it in quotations, to try to show that I admitted that the value of that word has been compromised...
I would love to discuss this issue, but you are starting to sound like Kyu.
Thanks,
-Pip
